Objective The objective of this challenge is to design a feedback controller to position the output of a linear flexible drive. The experiment apparatus consists of one IP02 cart followed by two linear flexible joint carts. The three carts are coupled via linear springs and each cart is instrumented with an encoder to measure its position relative to the track.
Figure 2 IP02 system with two Linear flexible joints with
carts.
Substituting system parameters we obtain the following linear
model about the quiescent point (Matlab script lfjc_2l.m).
with the states defined as:
3 Figure 1 Spring coupling between carts. 2
Control system design
The open loop system can be used to design a state feedback
controller of the form:
Figure 3 Final cart
Open loop model
The controller is designed using LQR and the resulting
The system model is derived using Maple. The file feedback gain is: lfjc_2l.map can be read into Maple to execute the derivation. (Enter read `lfjc_2l.map `; in Maple). It generates an output file lfjc_2l_m.map which is then used in MATLAB. 4 Setting up The model is derived using the Lagrangian formulation. A Wire up the system as described in the table below. simple representation is shown in Figure 4. This is used to derive the kinetic and potential energies in the system. UPM input MultiQ D/A #0 The dynamic equations are derived and then a linear model is derived by linearizing about the quiescent point. IP02 Motor To UPM1503 output, Gain = 3 Cable
X3 X2 X1 F
M1
M2
Figure 4 Simplified model of 3 cart system.
M3
IP02 cart encoder
To Encoder # 0 on MultiQ
1st LFJC encoder
To Encoder # 1 on MultiQ
2nd LFJC encoder
To Encoder # 2 on MultiQ
Implementation and results
80
The controller is implemented using Simulink and
WinCon. The controller is drawn using Simulink - as can be seen in the file q_lfjc_2l.mdl. The realtime code is generated and then run in realtime using WinCon. The sampling period chosen is 1000 Hz. The controller applies step inputs to the system and alternates between full state feedback control and feedback only from the SRV02. The step responses clearly show the improvement in response when full state feedback is used.
70
60
50
40
30
20
A sine sweep is applied to the command to obtain the
frequency response at the output with and without full state feedback. The results are shown in Figure 5. The resonance is clearly eliminated when full state feedback is used. An FFT on the data also reveals removal of the resonant peak at about 6 Hz. The quicktime video v_lfjc_2l can also be seen using a quicktime player.
10
10
12
14
16
18
Figure 6 FFT of output cart position response to a sine sweep
input. Green trace is without full state feedback while Blue trace is with full state feedback.
0.15 qlfjc 2l\Amplitude
qlfjc 2l\X3
System Parameters
0.1
Symbol
Value
Units
Km
0.00767
Nm/Amp
Km (Torque constant)
0.00767
V/(rad/sec)
Rm (Motor resistance)
2.6
Kg (gear ratio)
3.7
NA
rp (Pinion radius)
.0063
Gear radius for
encoder
.0148
Encoder resolution
4000
counts/turn
Calibration
2.2703e-005
m /count
Jm(Motor inertia)
3.67 e-7
Kg m2
M_1
0.7
Kg
M_2 and M_3
0.4
Kg
K_s (stiffness)
363
N/m
0.05
-0.05
-0.1
10
Time
Figure 5 Step response of final cart position. First two
responses are without full state feedback while the subsequent responses are with full state feedback. Note how the response is dramatically improved with full state feedback.
